Clinton Scratches for the Homosexual Vote

Jonathan Darman of the Newsweek team wrote an article on gay rights and the Clinton campaign for president. I don't know why I take an interest in this topic, but I just know that I do. Maybe it's my theonomic conviction, which led me to write on the topic and ruminate the subject matter. To me, the article seemed more of a campaign clout than a advocacy plight for Clinton's approval of the same-sex agenda. Even in the article is seemed like the same-sex marriage advocates seemed unsatisfied with the Clinton campaign, and even asking for results in her administration, if she becomes president. Personally, I find her very dangerous sitting in the Oval Office. I am so opposed to the notion of marriage granted to the same-sex. I recently blogged a post on what form they could unionize themselves in a civil union, but it isn't called marriage per se. There are other factors that play a role here, but let's focus on the article.

"But for all her gay support, what has Clinton really done for gay rights? Not much, some gay activists say, but neither has Obama or Edwards." Regardless of the these fellow candidates 'failed attmepts' to secure a role for the same-sex community, it still begs the issue that Hillary isn't doing squat about this—and the homosexuals get it. Now of this I am not scared of. I hope she never does anything that will grant them marriage status under law. This is a divine right for the opposite sex. All I got out of this article is that Clinton is comfortable around homosexuals. Point granted. I work with them, but it doesn't mean I approve of their life-style. They are nice people, just like I would view any other heterosexual who treats me with the equal respect. Do I deprecate against any part of his life-style he exhibits? Yes, if I believe it is done unethically. Even straight people could be unjustified in their reasons for depriving homosexuals of their natural rights. There should always be a balance.

Therefore there is something to be said of this issue, and it is likely that it is going to be going away soon. It is only going to heat up the closer the primaries come to a close. Personally, I think Hillary's press coverage is just another plight to stay away from paying for her ad campaign in the primary race for the presidency. It is assumed in the article, and I believe it is definitely a plausible circumvention on the part of the Senator. No matter what she did in the past for the homosexual community, it still stands that she is trying her hardest to get these votes. To some it may work out, but to the rationally capable, she is shy of a lucid victory for the candidacy. If she's going to win the primaries, she needs a new trajectory.